Skip to main content

About your Search

20130101
20130131
STATION
MSNBCW 13
MSNBC 8
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
, his inaugural speech was very domestically focused. look, we just had elections in israel, john kerry not in the same place benjamin netanyahu is regarding a two-state solution, at least right now. there are huge challenges, iran, there are huge challenges in the foreign policy front that don't get talked about as much, but are clearly things that not only will be difficult for the president and his team to navigate, but will also have a significant say in how this president is viewed by history. >> and, by the way, we just got word that the white house is going to proceed with a nomination of general allen to be the nato supreme allied commander now that he's been cleared by the pentagon investigation going back to the petraeus case. thanks to all of you, david sanger and kelly o'donnell, of course, and chris cillizza, see you later. thanks very much. >>> clinton today put a lot of blame on congress for withholding aid. >> we have to get our act together between the administration and congress. if this is a priority and if we are serious about trying it help this government stand up
, because of his past statements on israel. schumer, i assume, will get in line. though probably not in a thrilled way, but those are the two i'm at least paying attention to. >> when chuck schumer was asked on "meet the press" we were sitting there on the set watching. it was luke warm at best. >> it's my understanding. there is a potential double digit group of senators who -- >> the door is opening now to -- >> to perform well in these courtesy -- he'll be in trouble. >> the president is now coming into the east room. we see him walking in now accompanied by leon panetta, chuck hagel, john brennan. let's listen. >> as president and commander in chief my most solemn obligation is the security of the american people. over the past for you years we've met that responsibility by ending the war in iraq and beginning a transition in afghanistan, by decimating the clat core and taking out osama bin laden. by disrupting terrorist plots and saving countless american lives. among an outstanding national security team, i am especially grateful to leon panetta who has led the cia and our
about the issue of israel and iran and some of his more controversial statements in the past about that. that's been a definite part of the back and forth we've seen. >> briefly, let me ask you on that score because of israel's strike into syria. questions about what the targeting was. it's now been condemned. the secretary general, at least at the united nations, saying that he has grave concerns. i shouldn't use the word condemned, but grave concerns about that israeli air strikes, the first in five years. at this time the united nations does not have details, he says, about the reported incident. what are they saying over there at the pentagon? we've also been briefed today that the vice president when he goes to the munich security conference this weekend is going to meet with the syrian envoy from the united nations, brahimi and will meet with the russian foreign minister and with the syrian national council. >> so far out of this building, while they're keeping many of the details close to the vest, we're not hearing any kind of condemnation, criticism, any negative response. in f
iran, his position on israel, and chuck schumer today coming out and saying that he feels confident that hagel is in line with where the president stands on these things, that he is willing to act unilaterally when it comes to iran and not take any options off the table, and that his position has changed because he understands that israel is now in really a defense position and is in a different place than when he made some of the those comments a few years ago. that will be the key moving forward, and, again, a lot of people looking to see what chuck schumer had to say before making the decision that, of course, barbara boxer also coming out and saying that she is going to support chuck hagel for this position. andrea. >> ruth, that clearly smooths the way because it was schumer's ambivalence and the ambivalence of other democrats, key democrats, even -- so if he weren't going to support chuck hagel, that would be a huge obstacle? >> that would have been a huge obstacle, but the cavalry was always coming, i think, i think senator schumer had concerns. i think probably excuse my cyn
for abortions. i want to hear how he plans to implement that. i want to hear what he has to say about israel and some of the statements that have been made about his past positions on israel. now, i think he has had a very strong record in support of israel, but i think those are questions that i want to hear him answer. >> and i know hillary clinton has just come back from this health scare. she says she's feeling better than ever. what are her future prospects? i know you have been a long-time close friend and supporter. what about hillary clinton in 2016 if she chooses? >> i think hillary can do whatever she decides she wants to do. like so many of her friends and admirers, i hope she'll get a chance to get some rest, to take it easy for a little while. i certainly appreciate and respect the tremendous job she's done as secretary of state. the miles that she's travel anded what she's given to the country and so i hope that she's going to have a chance to decide to do what she would like to do and if she decides to run for president, she will be a terrific candidate, and i think she will g
hearing is on friday. you're just back from israel. what is the view there now? >> well, the israelis are very cautious about not saying anything. you know, there was this whole business about interfering about the netanyahu government. they're being hyper cautious about not saying anything. that said there's a lot of worry that he is you're going to distance or work to distance the united states from israel, and that's kind of right beneath the surface. i don't think it's true, but i think this is what the worry is. >> today the president called benjamin netanyahu to congratulate him on his majority. >> i'm looking forward to their joint interview on "60 minutes." that's going to be very cuddly, i'm sure. >> at the same time do you think that a john kerry state department is going to be more engaged in trying to push the israeli-palestinian track, or does everything now depend on what happens in egypt? >> this is very interesting. there's going to be a lot of pressure on president obama from everyone from the king of jordan to the british prime minister. >> there already is. >> to re
is a vacuum, which is not good for israel and not good for those palestinians who still believe in a two-state solution. >> arguably, it's harder because of the arab spring and other events that happen. in retrospect, was there a lot of disagreement in the team about how to handle mubarak and do you think it sent a signal to other allies, saudi arabia, bahrain, that we're not going to be there for them? did it unsettle other parts of the world? >> i think it was an inevitable force of history, that when egyptian people were rising up in such large numbers asking for what we believe in, freedom and opportunity, a chance to, you know, chart their own democratic future, the united states cannot and should not be on the side of those who deny that. at the same time, i think there was a tremendous effort made to try to work with, send messages to, president mubarak and those around him to handle the situation in a fashion that would create some openings for real reform going forward. but that turned out not to be possible. >> that brings to mind the 2008 campaign commercial. when that phone c
issues, such as security in the sinai respect for the camp david peace accords with israel and the constructive role that we hope egypt can play in the region going forward, but, obviously, his statements and our grave concerns about them were at the outset of the meeting. the responses were satisfactory enough that we then went on to talk about some of the other vital regional strategic issues. >> now, the white house and the state department have both condemned what he said, so from my own experience, they would not have condemned what the president of egypt said if he had not, in fact, said it, if there were some -- if there weren't some factual base to this. going forward, is this just that he has a different job now, a different role to play and you think that he can be inclusive and is willing to certainly live up to the peace treaty with israel and be the responsible player that the white house hopes he can be? >> i'm hopeful, but frankly we're going to watch very closely his actions, as well as his words. you're right that there is a difference between what folks sa
about what he said about israel in the past and iran in the past, criticisms of some of his other statements certainly the statements about gay americans. >> i think for two, maybe three reasons. first of all, he is a very solid, sound thinker. he has been involved in these matters for decades. he comes at decisions by analysis. not by a mee jerk support for this philosophy or that, but what is best for the united states. that's a wonderful attitude, and i think he and john kerry have similar points of view, and they'll be a good team. but, secondly, he is -- he would be the first secretary of defense to have served as an enlisted man in the trenches. from uso to veterans administration, he understands the political and human problems in a way that no other secretary has. >> do you think that he has the experience and the skill to get his arms around that pentagon bureaucracy and all the pork that's embedded in it at a time when facing the sequester, we've had warnings from general dempsey and, of course, from leon panetta that we are facing the potential hollowing out of the forc
thinks we should be tougher on israel and more lenient all around. we need a defense secretary who understands and fully appreciates the danger of a nuclear iran and the importance of the strong u.s.-israel alliance. >> do you think chuck hagel doesn't understand the danger of a nuclear iran? >> well, i think it's much more complicated than that. i think there are legitimate reasons, and i think folks like senator cornyn have good reason to have questions about senator hagel's viewpoint when it comes to looking at the -- at the american foreign policy. >> does the president deserve to have the -- >> i firmly believe when you get to choose the cabinet that you want and there, of course, is the advice and consent of the senate, and that's an important part of the process. i think that's why these hearings are going to be quite illuminating. i think you will see some changes from senator hagel based on some of the past statements that he has made. he has had some policy prescriptions that haven't worked out right, and i think many of these senators are going to explore those, and as p
relationship with our great ally israel, which included his attitude toward gays in the military, which included his attitude towards making sure that women in the military are protected from rape m military and, many of the, have the same reproductive health care as women outside the military. this wasn't one question. it was a series of questions. i will say and i sent that with his permission -- he sent those answers out. i felt his answers were very understanding of where we are as a nation now. i think he has evolved on a number of issues. the most important thing to me is he is very loyal to our president. our president has done so well on foreign policy. he has he wanteded one more. he is about to end another war. i think chuck hagel is his choice, and as long as i am satisfied with those answers, i will be supporting him, and i hope my colleagues will as well. >> looking forward also on the gun issue. do you think there's a reasonable solution that's possible that we'll come bin some of the things you have add coindicated so strongly for, including the assault weapons ban, and o
down with chuck this afternoon. i have tough questions for him with regard to iran and israel. i also have concerns with how he will treat women in the military. i want to make sure that he will be a leader for making sure we reduce the number of violence against women in the military. some estimates are 16,000 assaults or rapes a year in the missile. that has to end, and so we need to champion for women. we also need a champion for the full repeal of don't ask don't tell, and there's a lot of privileges that spouses of lgbt couples are not getting today. i need to know from him that he will not not advance the policies of the administration, with iran, with women, with lgbt and be a leader on those issues, and that's what's most important to me. i'm hopeful that this afternoon i will get some very clear, direct, and honest answers on those issues, and feel assured that he can lead our military in the direction it needs to go. >> thank you so much, senator. we hope to follow-up with you on that in the coming days after your meeting. thank you. >> next, in our daily fix, what challenge
and israel problems that he has had with chuck schumer. i'm not sure he is going to be able to quiet all the republicans that are nervous about him, but, again, this is the president's choice. he is a republican. i think it will be tough for republicans to oppose him in block. >> barring some unusual circumstance that we don't know about coming up at the hearing, jonathan, presidents do get the cabinets that they want most often, but we've also seen that the republican opposition has really struck by watching the republican questioning of both hillary clinton and john kerry. hillary clinton questioned about benghazi, clearly a setback, and a major crisis revealing that the state department was not prepared for the kind of security and threat warnings that they should have been on top of, but the questioning of hillary clinton by senator johnson and some of the others was, let's just say, less than effective. >> less than effective, and, you know, i would say as i wrote yesterday, rude, disrespectful. i think what we're seeing here is senator johnson is a first term member of the senate.
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)